Why I Hate Laura Kalpakian's Cosette, The Sequel to Les Misérables
by MissFiyerabaMeponineSherlock
Summary: Laura Kalpakian wrote, what she calls, "The Sequel to Les Misérables". The book, entitled Cosette, does not deserve the title of 'sequel' and can, in my opinion, barely even qualify as a fanfiction at best. Here are my notes on each chapter and the reasons why I hate this 'book'.
1. Chapter 1

**Reasons Why I Hate Laura Kalpakian's "Cosette, The Sequel to Les Misérables"**

Chapter 1

Firstly, Kalpakian goes back and rewrites the ending of _Les Misérables_, as if Hugo's genius wasn't good enough.

(page 5 [which the story starts on])

Cosette is already annoying, just read the letter she writes to Marius and tell me that she doesn't come off as needy. I dare you.

(page 6)

In which she completely changes the character of Toussaint. Toussaint, in the brick, is timid and stuttering, here she is outspoken and even tells off the coachman.

(page 7)

Laura Kalpakian has now changed Cosette's character. Cosette would never speak to Valjean the way she does here, nor would she, to paraphrase Kalpakian, "Envy the coachman his swearing." One of the only personality traits of Cosette is her innocence. Here, she has lost that.

(page 8)

Cosette's character is made to be more outspoken, which she certainly never was in the brick. Now, we also see Kalpakian change Valjean's character (He says to Cosette: "You are a girl, Cosette, and there are many things you can't understand." which is something he certainly wouldn't have said in the brick.). Valjean hardly speaks to Cosette with respect in this.

(page 9)

There is the sentence, said by the coachman, "They say you shit yourself blue with the cholera, and die in a few hours." Victor Hugo made a point of not swearing in his writing, of retaining innocence in his work. Laura Kalpakian has now completely disregarded that.

(page 10)

Cosette loses even more of her innocence as she thinks about Marius and his body pressed against hers. Excuse me? I don't think so! First of all, they kissed only once or twice. Secondly, Hugo even wrote that "Cosette had leaned over and the fastenings on her dress had loosened, revealing the swelling of her breasts. Marius looked away." Kalpakian writes, "The wall still held the afternoon sun, even after dark, and the warmth of Marius' body radiated over her breasts and the warmth of his hands penetrated her silk robes." Marius and Cosette hardly had any physical contact in the brick. They hardly even dared to hold hands!

**That concludes chapter one, page by page.**


	2. Chapter 2

**Why I Hate Laura Kalpakian's "Cosette, The Sequel to Les Misérables"**

Chapter 2

Kalpakian is still rewriting the ending of _Les Misérables_. Apparently the original wasn't good enough for her.

(page 11)

Kalpakian makes reference to Marius' mother and him 'enduring the loss' of her. In the brick, Hugo says that Marius' mother died when Marius was very young and, therefore, he would have no memory of her. He did not 'endure the loss' of her.

(page 12)

Marius shouts at a café owner, whom he has just bumped into, "Long live the French Republic!" Marius did not actually have much of an interest in the revolution and only really joined to die, since he could not be with Cosette. He wouldn't have shouted this. Also, Marius seems already to have knowledge of the barricades formed, whereas, in the brick, it was Éponine who says to him "Your friends are waiting for you at the barricade."

(page 13)

Nothing, surprisingly.

(page 14)

Marius has arrived at the barricade way before he actually does in the brick.

(page 15)

Who the hell is Verdier? Laura Kalpakian, you can't expect us to know who a character is when neither you, nor the original author of the original novel has ever mentioned him. Combeferre is described as "perhaps twenty-six, but with the look of middle age and a receding hairline already upon him". Kalpakian, that's Lesgles that you are thinking of. Get your characters right. Also, Combeferre speaks to Marius as if he were a close friend. Marius was not all that close with Combeferre in the brick. And, again, who the hell is Verdier?

(page 16)

"The students mostly wore threadbare coats, trousers shiny at the knee, and frayed cravats..." Um, no. Most of the students were actually well off. How else would they pay for their schooling? The only one that was not a student was Feuilly. Kalpakian suggests that only Marius knows that they are doomed. What about Grantaire? Or Enjolras with his speech "... and it is so that it may come that we are going to die."

(page 17)

She's done this multiple times now, but she keeps writing random words in French, trying to sound like Hugo. It makes no sense to have random words in French, Kalpakian, and it does not make you seem cool. "... but lacking somehow their esprit." There is no reason that _esprit_ shouldn't have been in English. And again, who the hell is Verdier? Why is he of any importance? Why should we care that his wife died of cholera three days ago?

(page 18)

There it is again, "They don't give a damn shit..." Learn some new words. Hugo would never have written this, and Kalpakian's writing is an insult to his genius. Oh, and again, "Casimir Périer got it from fucking his chamber maid." I repeat myself, Hugo made a point of retaining innocence in his writing. Kalpakian is ruining that. Here, Enjolras is described as "thin, sinewy, and fair." this contradicts Hugo, who makes him out to be extremely beautiful.

(page 19)

Enjolras says "The kings of France are finished. The time for the French Republic is now." He wouldn't say that until the battle is won, Kalpakian has made him seem cocky. Kalpakian calls the Corinth a bistro. The Corinth was a wine shop. Kalpakian starts talking, through Enjolras, about Marius' father's Waterloo sword. Even if this had existed in the brick, Enjolras wouldn't know about it because he wouldn't have listened to Marius' prattle about his Bonapartist father and, if he had, he wouldn't have cared enough to remember it.

(page 20)

Here, Marius tells them that the people are not rising. This never happened in the brick. Enjolras has now been described as frail, which, again, contradicts Hugo's description.

(page 21)

Marius says that he knows who Gavroche is, contradicting Hugo AGAIN. In the brick, it is Éponine who points Gavroche out to him as she is dying. Combeferre insults Javert, something that Combeferre wouldn't actually do, by saying "Do you carry your brains in your bladder, Javert?" If Combeferre were to insult someone, he would be a lot more clever than that. Kalpakian has now referenced the musical in having Javert say, "One day more and you'll piss blood..." This is _supposed _to be the sequel to the book, yet she references the musical _and_ Javert says something completely out of character. Who the hell is Clerons? Kalpakian keeps bringing in characters and not giving us any idea as to who they are. Oh, and this Cleron spits wine in Javert's face.

(page 22)

Kalpakian has just changed Éponine's death. She is not shot protecting Marius, but just shot in the back. Though, for some reason, her hand is bleeding too. Éponine tells Marius that she loves him _before_ she dies, and Marius seems to care a lot more about her than he does in the brick.

(page 23)

Marius kisses Éponine on the lips when she asks him to. Kalpakian references the musical again, "You'll keep me safe, won't you, close?" "Yes. Yes, Éponine. I promise." "Keep me warm?" "I swear." And Éponine's death isn't nearly as touching.

(page 24)

"She died while Marius wept against her pale throat." I'm sorry, but that's just... no... Marius never cried for Éponine in the brick. Her death isn't as meaningful and is changed way too much. Combeferre, Enjolras, Clerons (who ever the hell that is), and Pajol (who ever the hell that is) are all present for her death. In the brick, only Marius is there and her death is much more touching and written better.

**Thus concludes chapter 2. Anyone else want to shoot something yet?**


	3. Chapter 3

**Why I hate Laura Kalpakian's "Cosette, the Sequel to Les Misérables"**

Chapter 3

Kapakian continues to rewrite the ending to _Les Misérables_, which is an insult to the original book, the original author, and the fandom

(page 25)

Kalpakian references the musical again in saying "The Bishop had bought his [Valjean's] soul for God..." making it clear that Kalpakian lacks the intelligence to distinguish the two.

(pages 26-27)

Two more pages with no errors. That makes three, which is very surprising

(page 28)

Kalpakian calls Thénardier careless, which is one thing that he was not. Thénardier carefully thought through his schemes.

(page 29)

Instead of having Valjean reconsider his feelings about Marius immediately after taking his letter from Gavroche, he does so now and the part with Gavroche is mentioned only in passing.

(page 30)

Valjean makes reference to Marius being poor. How the hell would he know that? He has never met him, and has only read the letter that he wrote to Cosette, which never made any mention of his being poor. How the hell would Valjean know that he is poor?

(page 31)

This one isn't so much an error, as much as it's an idiotic pun, "An armed man [in reference to Valjean] in the rue de l'Homme Armé."

**This chapter was short, so I'll combine it with chapter 4.**

Chapter 4

In which Kalpakian continues to rewrite the ending to _Les Misérables_, an insult to classic literature

(page 32)

Kalpakian writes that Marius helps with the injured, having been trained by Combeferre. This never happened in the brick.

(page 33)

Feuilly carves into the wall of the Corinthe "Vive le peuple!" Wrong. He wrote "Vivent les peuples." Again, who the hell is Clerons?

(page 34)

Marius writes another letter to Cosette, at the end writing for the finder to deliver it to Rue de l'Homme Armé. This is pointless as, in the event of his death and by the time the letter would have been found, Cosette would be gone, in England.

(page 35)

Enjolras addresses Marius as friend, something that they were not. Enjolras' face is described as pallid, again contradicting Victor Hugo's description of him. Enjolras tells anyone who wishes to leave to do so, in the book it is specified that only four can leave as they have four National Guard uniforms to be used as a disguise and Valjean ends up giving them a fifth. Pajol is mentioned again, we still don't know who he is. Marius speaks passionately about the revolution, which he cared little about in the brick. Colville is brought into the story with no introduction. Verdier makes another appearance.

(page 36)

What the hell is a "Parisian's shrug"?

(page 37)

Kalpakian writes that Gavroche does not starve. This is a lie. Now Kalpakian combines two of her errors: using French when unnecessary, and swearing ("...I said, Enough of this merde.") Who the hell are Blanchard, Colville, Latour, Clerons, and Aulard? Also, Aulard has cholera which is very deadly and contagious. He probably wouldn't have been alive enough to even be at the barricade.

(page 38)

More swearing that involves excrement. Seriously, Kalpakian, learn more words.

(page 39)

Enjolras says, "... like vermin on the back of a rat." Enjolras would say much more clever things than that.

(page 40)

The Amis seem no where near as witty or intelligent as they are in the brick

(page 41)

The musical is referenced AGAIN when Kalpakian writes, "No one is coming to help you to fight!" DAMN IT KALPAKIAN, LEARN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE BOOK AN THE MUSICAL AND GET A LARGER VOCABULARY! In what world would Enjolras stand atop the barricade and yell to the army, "Merde!"

**Excuse me while I go and smack my head off a wall... This book is shit, which, apparently, happens to be Laura Kalpakian's favourite word.**


	4. Chapter 4

**Why I hate Laura Kalpakian's "Cosette, the sequel to Les Misérables"**

Chapter 5

In which Kalpakian annoys us further by continuing to rewrite the ending to _Les Misérables_

(page 42)

Kalpakian writes that the cannon killed 3 insurgents. This never happened as a mattress had been placed so that it would take the cannonballs. Kalpakian writes that Cosette might risk Valjean's "outright anger" if she tells him about Marius, but Valjean rarely gets angry in the brick. In fact, I can't remember him getting angry at all, really.

(page 43)

Another musical reference, Toussaint says to Cosette, "... Your father is a saint." Valjean's room is described as military-like. In the brick, his room was almost completely bare. Cosette seems brave, contradicting her timid "personality" in the brick. Cosette, for the first time in this novel, actually seems intelligent in assuming that Valjean is in danger (he has gone to the barricades, though she doesn't know that).

(page 44)

Cosette says, regarding Valjean, "Saints don't get angry." which contradicts her previous thoughts.

(page 45)

Okay, seriously, now Cosette is following the sound of gunshots. When was Cosette ever that brave? Seriously!? And now she's back-talking a soldier, something that she would never have done in the brick.

(page 46)

Cosette is just completely rude to this soldier–who is actually that Verdier guy–who is trying to help her. Seriously, what the hell!?

(page 47)

Oh, there it is again! Laura Kalpakian's favourite word! And now, where she was brave only moments ago, Cosette is a whimpering little fool.

(page 48)

Aaand we have people assuming that Cosette is a prostitute. Kalpakian, do you honestly think that prostitutes would be able to afford the luxurious clothes that this bourgeoise girl is wearing? And we also have this sentence, spoken by Verdier to the concierge, "... Fail in this and His Majesty's fusiliers will relieve you of your balls." Victor Hugo would never write something like that.

**This book angers me deeply. It makes me want to shoot something... Anyway, since this chapter was also short, I will combine it with chapter 6**

Chapter 6

She's still rewriting _Les Misérables_

(page 49)

Enjolras tells Valjean, who has just requested to kill Javert, to slit the spy's throat, contradicting the brick, where Enjorlas gives his carbine to Valjean to shoot Javert. Also, Enjolras calls Javert a swine which is just... no... "Enjolras and Marius exchanged a last salute, a farewell, as a flood of soldiers and bayonets engulfed them..." What? QUIT CHANGING THINGS, KALPAKIAN!

(page 50)

Everybody else has sought refuge in the Corinth and Marius, alone, remains outside. That's just wrong. Marius was the least invested in the revolution, even if he did have a death wish. Enjolras and the others would not just abandon him like that. My God, Kalpakian, stop screwing everything up. At least she got Combeferre's three stabs from a bayonet right and– WHAT THE HELL DID I JUST READ!? " ...Enjolras' brains splattered from his broken head and dripped down the walls of the Corinth, where his body lay draped across a bullet-riddled window..." WHAT THE HELL! SHE JUST CHANGED HIS DEATH AND DIDN'T EVEN MENTION GRANTAIRE! EXCUSE ME WHILE I INTERNALLY EXPLODE!

(page 51)

She writes that Valjean ran whilst carrying Marius. Victor Hugo makes it quite clear that Marius was heavy and that carrying him through the sludge of the sewers was quite the task. Therefore, Valjean would be unable to run with him. Kalpakian has now made it clear that, not only is she completely ignorant of _Les Misérables_, but that she also appears not to know how hard it is to carry dead weight.

**Since that chapter was also short, I will do chapter 7 as well.**

Chapter 7

I still refuse to call this a "sequel" as Kalpakian continues to rewrite the ending to _Les Misérables_

(page 55)

She skips right over Marius being injured and dying and sick and right to Mardi Gras, which was, in the brick, the day that Marius and Cosette get married. Also no mention of Gillenormand finally accepting Marius' love for Cosette and permitting him to get married. Kalpakian, if you're going to rewrite something, then for God's sake, be thorough.

(page 56)

Cosette's hair is described as honey-brown. Wrong. It was chestnut-brown. Marius seems unable to think of anything but Cosette. Litterally. His thoughts are written as, _Cosette, Cosette, Cosette._

(page 57)

Okay, so Kalpakian does mention that Marius nearly died, but only in passing and not in detail like Hugo did. Valjean "basks in her [Cosette's] luminous happiness." Um, what happened to him being upset about losing the only person that means anything to him? Kalpakian gives Monsieur Gillenormand a name, Luc-Esprit. No, no, no, no! His first name is never given... just no... Another musical reference "If Cosette's father was a saint..."

(page 58)

What the hell... Gillenormand says to Columbine (which, for those of you who don't know, is a type of clown [commedia del arte] from the 17th century that wears these really strange looking masks. There are others too, like El Capitaine, or Harlequin.) "Bend over and I promise I'll kiss you." Seriously, what the actual hell! Now Kalpakian writes that Gillenormand, after meeting Cosette, thought that they should marry, insisted even. No, he was still doubtful because he thought she had no money. She also writes that he didn't care that she had no money.

(page 59)

Kalpakian refers to an "Aunt Adalaide"... Um, does she mean Aunt Gillenormand? There is no "Aunt Adalaide." in _Les Misérables._ And what the hell did Valjean just say!? Gillenormand made a comment about embracing Napoleon, Robespierre, and others of the like if Cosette asked him to and he says he'd embrace liberty. Kalpakian writes: '"You would probably do that anyway." said Jean Valjean in a droll voice, it being understood between the men that Liberty went around bare-chested.' Valjean wouldn't say that!

(page 60)

Another mention of "Aunt Adalaide", a character who doesn't exist.

(page 61)

Marius' scar on his eyebrow leaves him with "an expression of ineffable sadness", yet he's filled with joy at seeing Cosette... What?

(page 62)

No errors, but, too be fair, the paragraph takes up only a third of the page.

**This book... it makes me cry... it's just so terrible!**


	5. Chapter 5

**Why I hate Laura Kalpakian's "Cosette, the Sequel to Les Misérables"**

Chapter 8

Laura Kalpakian is _still_ rewriting the ending to _Les Misérables._

(page 63)

She just took almost an exact quote from Les Mis and put it into her book. In Les Mis, Cosette says, "So it is true. My name is Marius. I am Madame You." Here, she says, "So it's true at last. My name is Marius too. I and Madame You and my every dream fulfilled." YOU. CAN'T. DO. THAT! If you're going to write a terrible book and have the nerve to call it the sequel to a masterpiece, make a lot of errors in this supposed 'sequel' and use French when unnecessary, then you can't take a quote from the original book, change it eversoslightly, and call it your own. Just no. Who the _hell_ is Aunt Adalaide?

(page 64)

Now Kalpakian takes Gillenormand's speech and shortens it considerably, though still taking parts from the original and mashing it up with her own terrible writing. If you're going to write a book then for God's sake, come up with your own writing. There's some more unnecessary French, choose one language or the other to write in, Kalpakian, unless you're doing it reasonably. Jean Valjean "glows" seeing Cosette "take the first steps in her new world" No, because Valjean was actually quite miserable because he has lost Cosette to Marius.

(page 65)

What? Cosette has friends? "Mademoiselle de Bélessin" and her English friend "Miss Helen Talbot." from the convent, apparently.

(page 66)

Oh! Aaaaand there it is! Kalpakian's favourite word again! "They say he [Marius] came from the sewer dripping shit." Seriously, get a better vocabulary.

(page 67)

She's done this a few times now, she keeps calling Théodore Gillenormand "Théo". She hasn't used his full name once. That bothers me.

**That chapter was short, so I'll combine it with the very disturbing next chapter.**

Chapter 9

Excuse me while I gag at Kalpakian's pathetic attempt at a sequel, in which she continues to rewrite the ending to _Les Misérables._

(page 68)

Cosette basically says that she would have had sex with Marius even if they hadn't be allowed to marry. Also, Marius says that, in the gardens of Rue Plumet, he sometimes wanted her more than he loved her. Well, there goes Victor Hugo's innocent little love story. Marius feels Cosette's boobs. That's more than we need to know, Kalpakian.

(page 69)

I... I can't even... it's just so wrong and so not Les Mis. Kalpakian describes Cosette's breasts. Cosette doesn't even know what a nipple is! Or what anything else is called for that matter!

(page 70)

And they're having sex.

**Thank **_**God**_** that chapter was short.**

Chapter 10

She's still rewriting it... *twitches*

(page 71)

Okay, I _so _did not need to know that Marius and Cosette's thighs were slick, shiny, and wet. Cosette's hair is described, again, as honey-coloured. It was a chestnut-brown. AND I DID NOT NEED TO KNOW THAT, KALPAKIAN!

(page 72)

Well Valjean was rather quick to tell Marius who he was. Too quick, actually.

(page 73)

Valjean refers to himself as 24601. That's wrong, his number was changed to 9430.

(page 74)

Valjean appears to know Marius' life story (everything about his father) when no one ever told him anything.

(page 75)

OKAY ENOUGH WITH THE REFERENCES TO MARIUS AND COSETTE HAVING SEX! VICTOR HUGO WOULD NEVER WRITE ANYTHING LIKE THIS SO KNOCK IT OFF!

(page 76)

Marius asks Valjean about the night at the barricade, having seen him there. In the brick, Valjean had already convinced him that he hadn't been at the barricade.

(page 77)

*twitches* She just tried to use "les misérables" in a sentence... she failed...

(page 78)

Cosette is a bit too annoying here and too outspoken for her character. She insults politics, which bothers me and probably many other people. SHE JUST CALLED LAW BORING TOO! WITH HER LAWYER OF A HUSBAND STANDING NEXT TO HER! Also, Kalpakian steals some more lines from Les Mis, proving that she is too ignorant to come up with her own.

(page 79)

None on this page. To be fair, the text doesn't even take up a sixth of the page.

**I really do hate this book...**


End file.
